Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    January 26, 2012 8:48am-9:18am PST

8:48 am
give us a great deal of flexibility and the ultimate selection of sites. we pick these sites based on coverage, but we know that things come up. the release might be too expensive. there may be technical considerations that we have identified at a site. there could be other problems with the site. so we have the flexibility in this agreement to substitute sites through about the next six months. so if the side that we have that covers the bayview and hunters point, i believe that is at 200 paul avenue. it that side door to fall through, we could use candlestick park as a backup. that site could be too expensive, and then we would look at the alternate. but based on coverage, the other side was a little bit better for us than candlestick. we tried to go for the best coverage, but we know we will probably have to do some
8:49 am
shuffling. supervisor kim: the current constellation of sites, does that actually make an impact at candlestick park? there are so many people there. it is true, you cannot communicate you cannot do text messages. will this have an impact on that? >> the bay web network will not be used by any of the 60,000 individuals better act candlestick park. supervisor kim: so police officers and safety officers will be able to communicate at candlestick park with this new system? >> yes, it will. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisor. >> thank you. rokiit is a good introduction ty hopefully very brief presentation here. i explained that the side agreement was built for flexibility, and we know that we
8:50 am
may have to exchange and shuffled the sights around, and we have the flexibility to do that. the department has provided two slides, two spreadsheets. i think they have been distributed to you prefer the first spreadsheet is a title -- supervisor chu: maybe i can ask you to present that at the podium, and you can put the slide on the screen. >> absolutely. the first slide i would direct your attention to is bay web site costs. this provides some information for you. the middle column are the sites that are identified in the budget analyst report.
8:51 am
the column on the far right are some revised estimates that we put together, and this is really designed to provide a range for you. the budget analyst report, which we think was an excellent report and we thank the budget analyst for their report on this, but we believe that the $6.9 million is a very high end estimate, the high end of the range. we think that probably a better way to bracket these costs would be to look at them falling somewhere in between the $6.9 million and the $3 million that we have identified in our target cost category. the big difference here, the only real difference, are the site leases. we are in the process, just starting the process, with real- estate, going to the individual landlords for the 11 police sites and determining -- eleven
8:52 am
at least sites and determining what our lease costs will be. we have talked to some of the landlords we know. in some of the sites, the rates will be between $1,500.20 $500 a month. to be very conservative, for the sites we have not talked to landlords yet, we set a $7,500 per month high end estimate. we believe that is too high, and we also believe that we cannot afford $7,500 a month for any of the sides. we understand the concerns about the costs, but we believe we can work with the landlords and work with our ability to substitute site set to come up with a range that is, over 12 years, a little less expensive -- a lot less expensive and better for the city in the long run. briefly, the second slide want to talk about is a slide that
8:53 am
described the direct cost of this particular legislation that you have before you today. again, we have divided it these costs of into wide and we will do this fiscal year and then over the following 12 years. this fiscal year, we have planning to permit review. that is the $5,800 charge from planning. that is already paid. that has been paid out of dem's current budget. we have estimates of staff time for the department of real estate to work on at the police this. and for the permits that we will need to get from dbi for the work. in this current fiscal year, we anticipate $92,000 in additional costs that we would be to cover. over the following 12 years, we
8:54 am
anticipated additional permits, $150,000 for staff time from the department of technology to work with motorola while doing the construction work. and we will have electricity costs for the city-owned sites that we would incur, about $288,000 over 12 years. the lease costs, there are no lease costs of a rise in this agreement. we will have to come back to the board after renegotiate the leases and its subsequent approval from the board from each of the leases. so you have the ability in the future, with those lease agreements, to review what those costs actually are going to be and to approve of them separately or not.
8:55 am
and we will be working with the department of real-estate to hopefully package of a set of leases and come back to the board as soon as we got the negotiated. and you would have the actual cost of the lease payment before you. supervisor chu: thank you. a quick question. supervisor avalos? supervisor avalos: what department will bear the cost, dem, police, or fire? >> ultimately, the public safety departments will have to bear some of the costs. we're working with the mayor's office now to try to work that out. obviously, that will become a big concern beginning with the upcoming fiscal year. we do not have a whole lot of costs to allocate for this current fiscal year. but with the budget process that is coming at for the 2013 fiscal year, we will have that information is sorted out and presented it to you as part of
8:56 am
that budget. supervisor avalos: as this system goes forward and becomes implemented, does it offset any the other costs, some cost savings to help cover the additional cost? >> in terms of radio devices in the service costs, that is true. police, fire, public safety departments will have to pay the cost of those services. this would replace those costs. so the cost of devices and the cost of the service itself when we get to those points, we view that as a wash. if you were to go with the commercial service, you'd be paying the commercial service for that same service and those same devices. there would be cost savings in the fact that these departments would not have to purchase commercial data services but would use this service instead. >> and that has not been estimated. it is too early. >> other than very preliminary,
8:57 am
no, we're still working on that. supervisor chu: i have a follow- up question about finances. in terms of the cost, what i am gathering from this information is from a fiscal year basis, you have about $92,000 anticipated for this year. in terms of whether we have the money to pay for it, does the department have it in their budget to pay for the real estate time and for the dbi's time? is that something had anticipated? >> we had anticipated it. i do not know how we have handled it in the budget. i would have to defer to -- >> [inaudible] it is under $100,000. it has not been identified at this time. supervisor chu: you would anticipate perhaps working within your department's budget to find that money, correct? >> we do not anticipate coming back to the board and asking for
8:58 am
this money, no. supervisor chu: in terms of the ongoing expenses, the electricity and the least, you have talked about the ongoing expenses, expecting it to be something around $228,000 in terms of the more realistic price range for an ongoing basis, and then a one-time cost. >> correct. supervisor chu: you're still working with the mayor's budget office to fund those in the coming years? >> that is correct. but the $272,000 also includes the $92,000, so that would be reduced for future fiscal years. supervisor chu: can you explain what the $30,000 dbi and a $150,000 -- what those mean? >> as part of the site use agreement, we worked out -- actually, on the regional basis, this was the same for all the
8:59 am
counties that are entering into site use agreement. motorola would be responsible for all of the so-called construction hard costs, equipment, construction on the site, those kinds of things. the jurist pensions would be responsible for permits, staff time -- indeed jurisdictions would be responsible for permanently and staff time, those types of things. the $30,000 would be a payment to, i believe, dbi, to pull the permits for the work done on each of these sites. the $150,000, we did a rough estimate with the department of technology, and that is essentially the cost of one full-time staff person to work with motorola over the course of the year, to escort motorola on the site. >> looking at the next 10 years,
9:00 am
we anticipate that we will no longer needed the 800 mhz system, that we will have the 700 mhz system which has voip and data. ultimately, i think we'll end up saving money. we will not need redundant systems at that point. supervisor chu: dbi $30,000 and wondered $50,000 for dt, we expect that to be an ongoing expense for the 700 mhz system? >> no, that is not ongoing. that is a one-time expense. supervisor chu: ok. the 700 mhz versus the 800 mhz system. the difference is that the 78 mhz system transfers data, indeed hundred mhz system is only a voice system for being out -- being able to communicate verbally. the idea is over the course of
9:01 am
this 12-year time span that we have calculated, we would expect that the 800 mhz system might go away because you might have a voice-over ip or whatever system with the 700 mhz system? >> that is correct. in the police department has devices in their cars, and that is also only data. it is like a stupid computer. you know, they cannot get any pictures or anything else. ultimately, what i would envision here is something that every police officer, firefighter, sheriff could have in their vehicle or on their person or they could talk, where they would be able to communicate of voice and also send the data. supervisor chu: in terms of the allocation, you talked about that you would not be requesting equipment purchases, therefore you have not requested
9:02 am
that for this coming fiscal year but the fiscal year after. >> right, 20-13 -- 2013, 2014, 2015. that will be in the budgets. i would assume that as we roll this out and test the system, it is a private system, we're not going to ask for thousands of the equipment at once. i would rely on a chief sur to decide how they would roll this out in his police department and how that would work out. supervisor chu: we still have a lot of money that would come in from the federal government that was available for the purchase of equipment and other things. is that going to be something we anticipate looking to as a funding source during that time frame? >> i think so. i have followed that funding closely. this past year, many of them got cut out. we think probably all of the
9:03 am
tier two's will get cut out this year. 2012, san francisco has been lucky in receiving the same amount of money that we have. we are a tier one city in past years. yes are hoping we will continue to. but i am not a mind-reader. i do not know what congress will do. but that is a potential source of funding. supervisor kim: two quick questions. one was on its the one fte, the radio technician, $150,000. is this really a full-time position? someone who is going to walk around with motorola to show them through sites? quite obviously, it is not one full-time decision dedicated and throughout the whole year. but we tried to estimated as one fte. it will probably be broken up
9:04 am
among several individuals, and there will be peak times when there is more escorting required. in my to take a couple individuals. and then it down time when there is no work to be done. we just tried to provide a rough estimate of what the total cost of that work would be. supervisor kim: it says that dt can probably absorb the costs of this year, but then they will require $150,000 of additional funding. >> i do not think that is a question we can answer, because dt is not here. perhaps their budget analyst can answer that. but we got that figure from the department of technology. i will not second-guessed what the needs are. i am not exactly sure. supervisor kim: ok, it would be good to get an answer to that. might not -- my next question is
9:05 am
back to the 800 mhz. so this is a voice system. it says that mta is embarking on a this system. do we know if they have initiated the build-out, if they have started to do some of that work? we might ask mr. rose to answer that question. >> ok, i will reserve that. >> has our report states, we have been advised that they are starting on that system. supervisor kim: have they invested funding for the infrastructure? actually, the point of these questions is that i think we need more departments here to respond to our questions about what we look at in the overall
9:06 am
plan. this is not part of the coit plan. director, i know you sit on this committee, but not having a good sense of how all the departments are working together to create these systems but these infrastructures for communication, and makes it difficult to kind of judge how we're going to make these systems work together. parking and traffic and mta. i just want to get a sense of what they are expecting, what they are planning for, how we are going to make these systems work together. >> i would like to ask michelle, who works for me, to answer that question, because she is a technical person here has been working very closely with mta. >> good morning, supervisors. department of emergency management and i am the interoperability program manager for the department. my job for the past several
9:07 am
years has been to collaborate across multiple departments on these wireless communications initiatives. i do want to talk about the different projects that have been presented through the coit process. we do have a $65 million radio replacement project, and that did go through the coit process. it is in the ict. that is for emergency radio communications. part of the coit request was to fund the public service, a voice radio commissions system, so this would be more of the non- emergency services, departments like parking and traffic, public works, public utilities commission, those departments. that was a request last fiscal year. that did not get approved. and as part of the process, we did identify the bay web system,
9:08 am
the project we're talking about today, as a future need and sending we would be collaborating with the departments on in the years to come. we are collaborating across all the departments. at this point, the 800 mhz radio replaced the project has been identified as a priority in through the process to be funded. it is not funded yet. the public service voice radio system has been requested through coit but is not funded at this time. the bay web system was presented to members of coit, and we do have the funding from this federal grant. supervisor kim: is it possible the park and rec and mta could utilize the bay web system instead? >> we are in those discussions as we speak. the bay web system, the use of the spectrum is regulated by the
9:09 am
fcc. and at the fcc has just recently made some rulings stating that those types of non-emergency departments do fill the role of public safety, therefore they're qualified to use the spectrum. there was some sort of national debate on that issue. but they have made some rulings. so our process moving forward is to work with those departments to say this is available to you, and let's see how we can fit this into your i.t. plans going forward. those discussions are happening. supervisor avalos: if those departments are available or if the bay web is available for those departments, do those departments need to go with the $65 million emergency system? >> the $65 million is the voice, radio technology is the ability to talk on our radios. we feel that need is still
9:10 am
necessary. our current system as an analog system. it is end of life, essentially, and we are going to need to replace that system. yes, we will need to make that investment, and we ask coit to make that investment. as we look at the bay web system, this will be a new capability that the departments can take advantage of. the department of public works, we have been having discussions with them on how they can improve their mobile work force, to get information to their users, maybe even taking maybe311 credibility out to the field. all the different types of applications to make users more effective in the field. we're starting those discussions, this is a new capability, this use of data. today, they just have their voice radios to talk and communicate and plan. supervisor avalos: so we expect
9:11 am
bay web to have a voice as well. so i am concerned that we will have -- how long do we expect the tendered mhz system -- and we're spending $65 million to move forward, while we're still looking at the proving what could be another systems, and we start to talk about renting devices and things like that. if we have some redundancy -- what is the true redundancy we have here? >> there is overlap in terms of the systems. the bay web system, we're talking about non-emergency voice. the capability to share voice but not in the mission critical push-to-stock environment. that is where you hit your emergency radio and you're immediately connected to your top group to talk to
9:12 am
immediately. that capability is not in the bay web system, but that is still an important capability for our users. as the bay web technology, based on 4g lte, san technology is verizon and at&t, as that technology evolves, we're working as public said the end users to influence that technology to have a push-to- talk capability, but it is not there today. supervisor chu: thank you, supervisor. do you have final comments? when you complete, i will ask the budget analyst to share his report. >> i had one final point to make. i will be brief. this point is really an additional benefit of this project, possibly above and beyond public safety. that is kind of the economic development possibilities of
9:13 am
having the first of its kind public safety network deployed here in the bay area. first and foremost, this is a stimulus grant prague -- project. so it is going to create jobs. motorola is anticipating 1300 new jobs in the region as a result of a building and maintaining the network. secondly, we believe that this network could serve as a unique, a one-of-a-kind test bed for our tech industry in the city to develop new applications, specifically for public safety use. this will be one of the first networks of its kind deployed anywhere, and there are plans to deploy it eventually nationwide. so this gives our tech industry, our people an opportunity to use it to test new applications that could be distributed not only regionally but actually worldwide, eventually. so i think we consider this an
9:14 am
economic development tool, as well as a public safety to will, because of the possibility of being able to test and develop new applications. and we have reached out to the mayor's office. the mayor has a new chief innovation officer. we have reached out to that individual to try to develop that part of it and gauge the and engage the amount of benefits, the level of benefits. i just wanted to fly that as a potential benefit of the system be on the public safety use. there is a representative from the department of technology here that would be happy to answer your question. supervisor chu: thank you. why don't we go to the budget analyst report. >> on page 7 of the report, and
9:15 am
this is based on the numbers provided by the department of emergency management, the total estimated cost to the city over the term of the proposed 12-year site user agreement would be just under -- around $6 million. on page 9 of our report, we point out, as of the writing of this report, the department of birds in management and the mayor's office could not identify a funding source to pay for these costs, such as they are likely to become a general expense. in the estimated cost of $6,998,000, for the subject agreement, to actually access
9:16 am
and propose the system, the city would have to purchase additional modems, computer devices that are not compatible with the new system. and then, -- that are compatible, i should say. and then, pay for the individual monthly subscriptions per device. $41 a month per device. however, in writing the report, the city has not developed specific plans for such additional devices to access the system, nor estimates of the number of needed devices under which the city departments would subscribe to the proposed new system, nor identify funding sources to pay for these additional devices or subscriptions. i just asked chief sur, how many police officers with the city have to go out and it purchased devices for? he is uncertain. he said it would be phased in,
9:17 am
so we do not know. if you take $43 a month, per device, and then multiplied that out of an unknown number of police officers, firefighters, deputy sheriffs, what is before you today is a small amount of the cost of this system. the large cost is the access to the system. as has also been pointed out, the department has stated, the city's computer plan does not include the proposed system in the five-year plan. that has not been identified in the plan, but as discussed today, it does include the 800 mhz city-wide radius system at a cost of approximately $65 mi


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on